I am glad I started this thread, now where's my 20 bucks Harry?

Pablo: I use no "method" - I just write/teach. I added Afterthoughts, because I always have "afterthoughts." All my books, thankfully, are "best sellers."

Gary: Strange...after the time it cost me to answer sillinesses here and the bit of aggravation caused, I was going to send YOU a bill!
HL.

Duaneberry,

If Jamy Ian Swiss isn't enough of an authority for you, then who is?

Now, I DO have quite a large working library and I am formally trained in doing deep academic research. For a fee, I will GLADLY do the research you need.

That being said, I have a FREE alternative for you. Read some books. I am presuming here that you do possess some books that were written prior to Close Up Card Magic. Do what we in academia call "close reading." In fact, if you have a copy of the Ganson Teach In Series, close read it and then close read Close Up Card Magic. Pay close attention to each respective authors' use of voice, clarity, attention to detail, and syntactic structure. Ganson was a VERY respected writer and teacher. He wrote some of the most important works in our art including the Routined Manipulation Series, The Vernon Card Trilogy, The Dai Vernon Book of Magic, Ultimate Secrets of Card Magic, The Entertaining Magic of Cy Endfield, plus mountains of columns in the great UK periodicals.

You will note IMMEDIATELY that Ganson wrote in first person plural. This style of writing was popular in 19th and EARLY 20th century academic journals. The strategy of using the first person plural was to imply a sense of expertise in one's field. The pedagogy of the day taught that instruction should be dispassionate and the student a passive receptor.

Yes, there WERE writers prior to Harry Lorayne who adopted a more conversational approach such as Theo Annemann and Art Lyle for example. However, these writers were the exception, not the norm.

Harry Lorayne, perhaps unwittingly, anticipated the constructivist approach to learning in which the student is no longer the passive receptor of instruction but is actively encouraged to dialog with the text and thus the author. The student, in constructivist theory is made an ACTIVE participant in her/his education. So, while Harry Lorayne has stated earlier in this thread that "he just teaches" he had in fact changed textuality in instruction. Educational psychologists, neurologists, and behaviorial psychologists, and cognitive psychologists have written literally FORESTS' worth of peer reviewed articles proving conclusively that this style of instruction is the MOST efficient style of instruction extant.

Lorayne's writing reflects quite accurately how we learn from others when in a live discursive environment - i.e., a CONSTRUCTIVIST environment. Think for a moment about a possible time when another magician instructed you personally on a specific sleight or effect. How did he talk to you? How did he teach? You could stop him and ask questions. He would be able to anticipate precisely WHERE you were going to have difficulty. A review of the literature prior to Close Up Card Magic will reveal to even the most casual reader that such a style really did not exist in magic prior to Lorayne.

Something else that Harry Lorayne brought to magic textuality was what he calls "afterthoughts." Once again, this strategy is FIRMLY grounded in constructivist theory. If you attended college, think back on your textbooks. Modern college textbooks ALWAYS reiterate salient points for review and often the author will elaborate and extrapolate. Such a strategy serves to engage cognitive processes in the student which increase the phenomenon of successful transference of newly acquired knowledge from working memory to long term memory. Comprehension strategies are enhanced through a number of psychological factors as well.

As it happens, I possess a Master's in Education and I am pursuing a Doctorate in Educational Psychology with emphasis on instructional strategies and how these strategies relate to cognitive and behavioral functioning.

All of that said, I DO love to do research. After all, I am a struggling artist in magic and music as well as a PhD candidate, so I can most DEFINITELY use the cash.

Ultimately though - and in the best constructivist fashion - you should do your own research and come to an informed decision based upon your own dialog with any given authors that you research.

This thread began as a thank you and a recognition of a towering figure in our art. The large corpus of work penned and filmed by Harry Lorayne speaks for itself. Testimony after testimony of magic's greats speak much more eloquently and certainly FAR more authoritatively than my voice.

I offer respectfully that in an Aristotelian sense with regard to logic that your question is valid. But validity and verity are not the same the same thing and validity can lead to the truth, or, it can lead the inquirer into a labyrinthine exercise in mere sophistry.

Namaste,
Vlad

Thanks Vlad for taking the time to post above. Interesting though that you write "perhaps unwittingly." I have only one year of High School so, of course, "unwittingly." I simply write the way I speak - I know no other way.

Gotta tell you though, when I read the original Close-Up Card Magic now (remember - written way back in 1961) I do cringe a bit. It was a few of those "cringers" (among a couple of other things) that made me decide to re-write my earlier books into The Classic Collection volumes. I learned a thing or two over the decades!

And, all so gratifying for an uneducated "dese, dems and dose" kid from the mean streets of the Lower East Side of Manhattan, NY. Some years ago, someone wrote that I was "the best expository writer alive today" (he was referring to both my magic and memory books) and your post above...I can't tell you how gratifying! Guess I owe a "thank you" to Duane for initiating all this! Best - HARRY L.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em Mr. Lorayne

Since I started in magic Harry's books were some of the first I began to read and study. Always looking forward to next. From that time until now he's never failed to deliver the goods. Like many, I'm looking forward to his next book CC3.

And I'm hoping he'll find somewhere in a dark corner another copy of his Personal Collection and send a PM.

Keep going Harry. I hope I can call you that. Magic needs stars like you.

Craig

Duane was asking someone else to do the research for him. No one is here to do another's work; this thread was to express appreciation for work well done by Harry Lorayne.

I'll go one step further. His memory books have done more for my Meniere's Disease than any of my neurologists, in a large part because of the easy friendliness of the writing style. ("How DARE Lorayne help a medical disability?!")

*jeep!
--Grandpa Chet

I respectfully submit that most of us here do understand that this is an appreciation thread. The verbiage of Duane's question suggests that he wanted proof of Swiss's statement and he wanted reviews of the book from that time. In my post, I had attempted to compare the writing/teaching styles pre and post CUCM. I had even made mention of Annemann and Lyle's conversational style. Still, these writers were the exception in my experience in reading the literature. I will qualify that by stating that I have not read everything that has been written in magic - and I do not think such a thing is possible given that the average life expectancy of a human being is approximately 22,000-26,000 days.

Yet, Duane's answer does lie in the literature extant. An easy way for him to assess this would be to join the free repository of magic classics now in the public domain at The Learned Pig, and peruse what is there - hundreds of books.

Yes, Gary had started this as an appreciation thread and he was quite clear about it. Duane's post would be a wonderful start for a new thread, IMHO, that discusses the evolution of magic instruction. I would offer that such a thread would be more fruitful in critical examination as its focus would be about pedagogical strategies in magic authorship.

Namaste,
Vlad

P.S.: The offer is still open to Duane if he would like the research done.



Duane's question is valid. In fact, logically, there is no such thing as an invalid query. But, the issue of veracity cannot be addressed unless the question's validity leads to a conclusion through logical discourse as to the veracity of a premise that generated a valid query. (Gotta love Aristotle and Hegel! )

I have encountered brilliant people on this Café and have been engaged in some of the most intellectually stimulating discourses on magic and mentalism.
Maybe we should agree to allow this thread to be as it was intended, and that is, as was accurately noted, an appreciation thread.

Namaste,
Vlad

There are two primary definitions of appreciation. One is to show gratitude. The other is to attempt to accurately study the qualities of something so as to determine its correct worth.

The second one is almost always the harder one. It's also almost always the more rewarding. Seems like Duane was attempting to do exactly that.

Hi Andrew,

I gave what I thought would a be an excellent strategy and that is for Duane to begin a new thread that has as its focus the evolution of teaching/writing in magic, or as I think I put, the evolution of magic pedagogy.

As you know, there is an excellent section of the Café in which such a discussion would certainly generate intelligent discussion. I would opine that such a thread would be quite useful for many of us provided it can be discussed dispassionately.

In terms of assessing worth, I would offer that "worth" is highly subjective. Just for discussion's sake, we could open a thread discussing the worth of magic blogs. You have experience as a blogger and could bring much to the table in favor of their worth. Perhaps others who used to read them but do not any longer might offer reasons why they do not. Such a discussion would be interesting on a deeper level in terms of how blogs have affected the notion of authoritative voice. As such, it too would be an appreciation thread by your second definition. I would welcome such a thread as authority and textuality are inextricably bound. The author, by virtue of expressing thoughts textually speaks authoritatively. Perhaps consensus would be reached concerning the worth of blogging, the "worth" of specific blogs that may surface during the course of a thread - there is certainly a plethora of of them. I think (I hope) you would agree that some have more worth (how would we define that by the way) than others.

Why do we find certain teachers more appealing than others? We have all had teachers, be it K-12 for many, and undergraduate and graduate studies for others in addition to mandatory education. We might ask introspectively why we found a certain teacher and/or professor more effective than others.

There are limitless possibilities.

Finally, I still hold that the purpose of this thread was and is an appreciation of Harry Lorayne and his work. Those who have praised him and it, have found worth and this thread is an expression of that.

I do think your post does offer MUCH food for thought in a new thread. Hopefully, someone will start one!

Namaste,
Vlad

I was at TAOM in Austin this weekend and I saw the set of four Apocalypse books. They are masterpieces. They were priced at $310 for the set and I was wondering if this is what they normally go for? I just wish I had more money at the time.

Damien: For the four volumes purchased at the same time, that price is a bit too high - not by much, but by a bit. HL.



Mormonyoyoman: I'm pleased that my memory books have been of benefit to you. I'm not familiar with the disease you mention, but I have had literally thousands of testimonials over the decades from people with strokes, brain damage, terrible things, telling me how learning/applying my systems have helped. On the back of the dustjacket of the hardcover version of Ageless Memory is this quote from neurologist Dr. Steven Zuckerman: "I have been using Harry Lorayne's memory-training techniques for years, for myself and for Alzheimer patients. I have had very gratifying results with my patients. Mr. Lorayne's systems probably have better clinical results than the currently available medicines." Best - HL.

My first magic book was..."The Magic Book" by Mr Lorayne. I still go back to it every now and then, after 30 years. I have even bought his Classic Collection 1 and two of his DVD´s - without being much interested in card magic. But it´s just fun to read his books and watch him perform. And you gotta agree he makes this place a lot funnier too

HÃ¥kan
:wavey:

Damien,

You might want to try calling Denny Haney. His prices are excellent and he is one of the good guys! I promise you that you won't regret investing in Apocalypse. I have seen the set sell new in the neighborhood of 265-285 USD. You will occasionally see volumes for sale here on the Café but not terribly frequently. While I agree with Mr. Lorayne that it is more cost effective to get all four volumes at once, if money IS a serious issue, then, instead of waiting until you have the cash for all four, then by all means, purchase them one at a time. If you looked through them at TAOM then you already know that each individual volume has lifetimes of magic to study.

I do hope that one way or another you will jump in.

Namaste,
Vlad

Namaste,
Vlad

I have a couple of Harry's books and videos. After seeing the way he conducts himself on a public forum, I doubt that I will purchase any more.

It's great when admiration for the art and admiration for the artist can find common alignment, but that doesn't always work out. C'est la vie.

Thanks very much to Pablo and Vlad for addressing some characteristics of the writing; that's appreciated. This thread appears to be scorched earth, so I won't attempt to continue the discussion here. Instead I'll take Vlad's advice and open a differently focused discussion elsewhere.

Sigh.

Milian: That's good; your loss.

I've got the card classics of Ken Krenzel and it's a great book!
I'm also planning to buy some more stuff from Mr. Lorayne (when my money bucket is filled again )

I don't care what someone is saying over the internet, it's the material that counts!

Amen!

Although I would enjoy a serious discussion about the state of magic writing circa 1961, it isn't necessary in order for me to recognize Mr. Lorayne's talent as a an author. I'm not a magic historian, but I am a lifetime student of card magic. I've been studying about twenty three years and I've read a lot of card books old and new. Harry is without a doub t one of the best ever. I'm in agreement with the OP.
As far as card magic goes, I think some people on the Café need to re-read Dai Vernons Foreword to Close-up Card Magic. The Professor states that Harry Lorayne is one of the best he's seen. Certainly, this statement alone from arguably the greatest exponent of pure sleight-of-hand in history should make us realize just whom we have in our midst here at the Café. I must say that I'm often appalled at the disrespect shown by some.
Anyway, Harry's writing style is what first got me excited about continuing my studies in those early years.
Rodney